Guide:How to spot a Mary Sue
While a character may not be Non-Canon Friendly, they may have fallen into the pitfalls of being a Mary Sue. Definition A Mary Sue (or Marty Stu) is largely a fluid concept. To some, it merely represents an overpowered character with awe-inspiring abilities and skill. To others it's more a name applied to author surrogation (or author insertion) into another character. Sometimes both definitions apply; all of which typically fulfil the role of wish fulfilment for the author. In contrast, this Wiki uses a comparatively solid definition of the term: A Mary Sue is any character or faction who, through the power of luck and fate, and their own sheer ability, break all or most of the realistic forces in the literature that represent them, to the point where suspension of disbelief is clearly shattered, and often - additionally - all enjoyment for the majority of typical readers that encounter the character/faction. A Mary Sue is characterised by being lords of fate and ability, showing mastery in many fields, general imperviousness to danger, in the short term and long; and the crushing blows of sheer improbability, often for little to no solid literary reason other than to simply be a powerful entity, existing in a demigod-like isolation away from all material circumstance, negative consequence, or even bare-faced canonical or logical impossibility. However, Mary Sues aren't all of these elements combined. Indeed, Mary-Sue"ism" does still exist in a character that demonstrates only one or two typical Mary Sue symptoms, thus classing as a Mary Sue like all others. Common Mary Sue Attributes There are several common factors which can be used to identify a Mary Sue. *A Mary Sue is often flawless in nearly any way or in their chosen profession, e.g. The best strategist, the best swordsman, the most accurate sniper, etc. These are often titles of a Sue, and often a pitfall, for flaws can serve to flesh out a character, make them relatable, perhaps likeable, or to inflict a dull sense of schadenfreude for the characters constructed to be despised by the audience. *On flaws, Sues that are "flawed" often have one or more major flaw that rarely comes into play or can be hand-waved on stage or off stage at the writers convenience. Take Super Man's Kyptonite and inability to use his x-ray vision to see through lead for example. These rarely come up as real hindrances, as Superman can often be saved from Kyptonite by a trusty side kick, or simple chance. Additionally, these things are quite often incredibly predictable. Plus, Superman can quite easily punch clean through lead, and for the original incarnation of Superman, merely make up more superpowers on the fly to defeat his opponent. Any character is bound to have several flaws, both minor and major, such as a drinking problem on top of being generally irritable and dour (and so fourth). These things create a character who can be understood and related with as opposed to put upon a pedestal for the writers own self aggrandisement. *Another notable sign that you have a Sue is when every other character they interact with immediately recognises the Sue's inherent "superiority", where they may praise them or come to their side near instantly. Those who even vaguely disagree with the Sue are often demonised by the writer in one way or another and are usually the token traitor or evil teammate who the Sue inevitably reprimands. In a truly typical, campy, "feel-good for all" example, they even manages to "convert" the said character by showing them the "error" of their ways. *Sues are often, especially in 40k, (Especially including the Imperium's finest warriors, Tau, or Eldar) presented as incorruptible. This can be taken with a grain of salt in some cases, such as the Sisters of Battle or Grey Knights, who are consistently depicted as being just too fanatical for Chaos to truly infest (fanaticism often has its own terrible costs). But be forewarned, for in 40k, nothing is truly safe from Chaos' touch. Chaos is depicted as the most insidious thing, beyond the reasoning and will of even the greatest mortals. Realise that fully half of the Emperor's own children succumbed to the temptation of chaos. Any competent writer of 40k knows that exposure to the pure, unadulterated energy of the Warp is devastating to the mortal form and soul, and if not, they're doomed to probably end up like Captain Titus. The purest Battle Sister would be torn asunder at its direct touch, or turned mad if exposed for but a second. And only the abomination of Kaldor Draigo and the most blessed of Chaos' followers can walk the stuff of the Warp and emerged unscathed. *It should also be noted that one does not need to be a thrall of Chaos to be deceived by it. It is often those so blind of faith that Chaos uses as unknowing puppets. An Inquisitor, hellbent on purifying a world, may accidentally unleash something far worse. A Cannoness, so obsessed with the banishment of a Daemon, may overlook some crucial information about her foe and in the end be the unwitting pawn in a great sacrifice or find her body and mind overtaken by the fiend by way of a cunning plan or dark ritual. *They are often notorious for never falling from grace in ways which humiliate them. A Mary Sue character may very easily suffer a trip-up or suffer a heartbreaking (a fittingly cliché adjective) tragedy, but to write it in ways where they never look bad is a Mary Sue symptom. Additionally, perhaps their freedom from looking bad in the course of their failures is further reinforced by a total freedom from negative consequence, or an eventual, mechanically born, conveniently-placed absolution from such consequence. *A character that continuously escapes from complex and difficult situations without ever realistically having any knowledge of how to achieve such is a Mary Sue. Say a character managed to escape their planet on a conveniently found starship, escapes all detection, lands on another planet a few years later, finds 3 STC's, sells them and earns a fortune, and then buys their way into becoming a planetary governor. Somebody like this is extremely Mary Sue, but even one of these feats is astronomical in itself without the character bending over backwards and/or having prior knowledge in their field. *A character that is too cliché may class as a Mary Sue, especially if their clichés are positive, beneficial, exist just for aesthetic, and/or are almost entirely string free and devoid of setbacks. If you cannot identify clichés, it is suggested you engage in experiencing a wider range of literature, film and other fictional media. *To build upon the above, it's important to realise that all beings and events are the product of their material circumstance. In reality and good fiction, everything is the result of a near infinite labyrinth of cause and effect that is so incomprehensible in its scope that many are forgiven for mistaking their luck or misfortune as being the result of fate. In fact, not only are they sculpted by it, but they are at the mercy of it. For instance, to illustrate a broad perspective: Wars do not appear out of nowhere, economic crises don't, technological breakthroughs, alliances, or revolutions don't either. Even life and death have their distinct, solid material causation. This same thing applies to characters. Nobody is ever "naturally stealthy", "naturally emotionless", "naturally intelligent and skilled", "naturally good and pure", "twisted and evil by nature", or a "writer by nature" (and so fourth). When somebody is good at any field, develops a character trait, forges a goal or vendetta, or makes a life decision, they must be motivated by their surroundings, and always calculate their future by analysing their surroundings (unless they're truly one to stagger through life blindly). Is willingly joining the Guard an investment of duty and faith in the Emperor or a wasteful abandonment of a comparatively stable life? Is becoming a Space Marine a sentence to die as a neophyte in the brutality of training or a chance to truly serve the Emperor as one of his finest? Additionally, what inspired them to do such? Do they have the money and connections to achieve such? For personality traits, are they oppressed and driven to loathe their rulers or are they rendered incapable of sympathising with the poor, sick and suffering due to a life of utmost luxury and freedom from hardship? Do they suffer from PTSD from time the Imperial Guard or other combat service? Are they permanently affected by the temptation of chaos after once brushing up against a possibility to succumb to it, much like the temptation of turning to drugs or alcohol to escape bleak or seriously damaging circumstances? Is your typical Imperial citizen addicted to drugs and/or alcohol due to their bleak and despondent life of punishing, low-pay work and zero personal freedom? Are they suicidal, or are they merely rendered hopeless and utterly capitulating to authority? All in all, these examples are merely glimpses into a wide range of considerations a character or faction must be accessed against. In good literature, noting exists without reason; if every behaviour and choice and step taken by your character or faction is thought out realistically and thoroughly, then the chance of your article being Mary Sue (or at the very least nonsensical and clichéd) is definitely smaller. Common Anti-Sue Attributes Common Balancing Attributes Mary Sue and Non-Canon Friendly Mary Sue versus Poorly Written Helpful Links